Men's Clothing Forums banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Initially, I thought that lower-waisted trousers were the way to go, but recently my tailor made me a suit with trousers that fit closer to my navel (natural waist) and I think the look is much better. It seems to elongate my legs and looks much more elegant. Isn't this the traditional/classic way to wear trousers? If so, why are so many men wearing their trousers closer to their hips?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
214 Posts
In fact, the point at which the trouser rise ends can be called the "fashion waist".
As a recovering fashion waist-ista, I can say, right on: trousers worn properly, i.e. at the natural waist, is the only way to go, for all the reasons the OP mentioned.

And more: no more belts, no more straining under the influence of either a slight a gain or loss in weight, no more sagging trousers at the end of the day.

Braces are freedom. Bully for braces.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 · (Edited)
Arnaud: are you saying no more belts for trouser in general, even when not wearing a suit. I really like the way suspenders look, but I asked if they were acceptable to wear just with trousers and a dress shirts (i.e., corporate causual) and other members said no way, not a good idea; they likened it to the "great depression" look. To me that doesn't make sense. It would seem that suspenders are an alternative to wearing a belt. Thus, if it is acceptable to wear a belt without a jacket/sport coat, why is it not acceptable to wear suspenders in the same manner? I don't mean to be a contrarian, but I just like to know why things are the way they are before I can agree or disagree with them.

Sator: the more I learn about men's dress, the more I dislike "fashion." God, if I see one more guy wearing his pants around his ass with his underwear showing, I think I may have to ask him what on earth would possess one to do that? :pic12337:
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
27,866 Posts
Initially, I thought that lower-waisted trousers were the way to go, but recently my tailor made me a suit with trousers that fit closer to my navel (natural waist) and I think the look is much better. It seems to elongate my legs and looks much more elegant. Isn't this the traditional/classic way to wear trousers? If so, why are so many men wearing their trousers closer to their hips?
1. Just about every man will look better with slacks with a rise adequate to reach his natural waist. (Or even a bit higher.)

2. Yes, that is the clasic way to wear trousers.

3. Low rise trousers are worn because they are fashionable. Fashion has nothing to do with what looks good. Fashion is a tool of the so-called Fashion Industry used to make more money. I.e., it is a point of departure.

The fashionable combination of low rise trousers with high-gorge, high-button stance jackets would be comical, if it weren't hideous. Though the jackets themselves look pretty dreadful.

Was thumbing through a catalog last evening where any model who did not stand perfectly straight and still had his belt and shirt protruding offensively above his pants with his jacket opening four or five inches above his belt line.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
214 Posts
Arnaud: are you saying no more belts for trouser in general, even when not wearing a suit. I really like the way suspenders look, but I asked if they were acceptable to wear just with trousers and a dress shirts (i.e., corporate causual) and other members said no way, not a good idea; they likened it to the "great depression" look. To me that doesn't make sense. It would seem that suspenders are an alternative to wearing a belt. Thus, if it is acceptable to wear a belt without a jacket/sport coat, why is it not acceptable to wear suspenders in the same manner? I don't mean to be a contrarian, but I just like to know why things are the way they are before I can agree or disagree with them.
All good, reasonable questions. But no, I have not completely given up on belts; when not wearing a jacket I still wear belted trousers, though I don't like it for the very reasons I like wearing braces now.

And you're correct, justinlw, in wondering about the sense of all this. To me it makes very little practical sense not to wear braces at all times now and the only reason I don't is that it would look odd, sans jacket, an opinion based less on tradition and propriety and more on my own personal aesthetic, which happens to coincide w/ the more traditional view of Sator.

I'd like to hear others view on just this issue: what is a new and devoted braces convert to do when not wearing a jacket? Some will quickly say: wear trousers that fit properly and you won't have to worry about this, which is an expensive solution b/c all one's trousers would then have to be bespoke. Not always practicable.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
27,866 Posts
I'd like to hear others view on just this issue: what is a new and devoted braces convert to do when not wearing a jacket? Some will quickly say: wear trousers that fit properly and you won't have to worry about this, which is an expensive solution b/c all one's trousers would then have to be bespoke. Not always practicable.
IMO, braces without a jacket or vest are not appealing. The only viable solution is belts. I don't find them uncomfortable providing the slacks are properly sized, and they can be enjoyable of themselves as part of a casual outfit. I.e., braided leather, surcingle belts, etc. that make nice accents with casual clothing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
270 Posts
The low waists are a crossover from the casual world, and specifically borrowed from jeans, which have a lower waist and closer fit. The lower, closer fit of jeans tends to draw attention to them, and they show the figure more; more formal pants are the opposite, they are designed to work within a broader ensemble and not draw attention to themselves or to the figure.

I'll take the contrarian view here by asserting that different waistlines have their place (except for ultra-low rise, which are atrocious, and very high rises, which are best left to '50's movie stars.) The low waist and close fit work well for jeans worn with a t-shirt or polo shirt; the jeans become the focus of the outfit for a very casual look.

I do have a couple of wool pants with a rise just below, rather than at, the waist; they tend to go best with just a tailored shirt or close-fitted sweater for a svelte look. If I am not wearing a jacket and the pants are at the waist, it tends to elongate my legs and shorten my torso for a gangly look; sitting slightly below the waist actually helps balance my figure. But for the suits, it's pretty much pants at the natural waist, and often worn with braces, which provides a balanced, continuous line from the shoulders to the heels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
270 Posts
IMO, braces without a jacket or vest are not appealing. The only viable solution is belts. I don't find them uncomfortable providing the slacks are properly sized, and they can be enjoyable of themselves as part of a casual outfit. I.e., braided leather, surcingle belts, etc. that make nice accents with casual clothing.
I am probably in the minority, in that I technically do not need belts or braces for my pants to stay in place (having a ~30" waist will do that for you.) But without a jacket, going straight from shirt to pants looks odd, so I like to have a belt to mark the transition. I'm not a fan of flashy belts, but something that goes well with the shoes is nice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
493 Posts
I am probably in the minority, in that I technically do not need belts or braces for my pants to stay in place (having a ~30" waist will do that for you.) But without a jacket, going straight from shirt to pants looks odd, so I like to have a belt to mark the transition. I'm not a fan of flashy belts, but something that goes well with the shoes is nice.
+1. I've never found a need for a belt for the purpose of holding up my pants either (29" waist). I agree that the belt adds an important delineation between the shirt and the pants and accentuates a narrow waist in relation to a broad shoulder in a very flattering way.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top